2004
Volume 117, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 0002-5275
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1244

Abstract

Abstract

Ever since their inception, the social sciences have struggled with their methods and explanatory models. For what are the building blocks of social reality and in what sense is this reality a social one? And how are observations of and descriptive statements about this social reality possible? Here, the so-called ‘dramaturgical model of human behaviour’ makes visible the normativity of social reality, and also the inability of the social sciences to deal with the everyday presence of second and first persons in social reality. Thus, the role available to social scientists in social reality turns out to be problematic. If we move beyond the knowledge society, we will have ways to come to terms with truth claims; but it remains to be seen whether there will then still be a role for the social sciences as an institution.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/ANTW.2025.4.002.BRAN
2025-11-01
2025-12-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barends, E. en Rousseau, D. (2018) Evidence-Based Management: How to Use Evidence to Make Better Organizational Decisions. London: Kogan Page Limited.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bloor, D. (2004) Sociology of Scientific Knowledge, in: I.Niiniluoto, M.Sintonen en J.Woleński (red.), Handbook of Epistemology. Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Biesta, G. (2010) Learner, Student, Speaker: Why it matters how we call those we teach, Educational Philosophy and Theory42, pp. 540-552. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00684.x
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brandom, R. (1994) Making It Explicit. Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brandom, R. (2000) Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bransen, J. (1999) Drie modellen van het menselijk handelen. Leuven: Peeters.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bransen, J. (2001) Verstehen and erklären; the philosophy of, in: N.J.Smelser en P.B.Baltes (red.) International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 16165-16170. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bransen, J. (2002) Normativity as the key to objectivity: An exploration of Robert Brandom’s articulating reasons, Inquiry45(3), pp. 373-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/002017402760258204
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bransen, J. (2010) Ongedisciplineerd streven naar begrip. Buytendijklezing, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bransen, J. (2017) Don’t be fooled. A philosophy of commonsense. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bransen, J. (2019) Gevormd of vervormd? Een pleidooi voor ander onderwijs. Leusden: ISVW Uitgevers.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bransen, J. (2024) En nu? De mens als bedreigde diersoort. Leusden: ISVW Uitgevers.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chakravartty, A. (2017) Scientific Realism, in: E.N.Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Verkregen van https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/scientific-realism/
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dennett, D. (1989) The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dennett, D. (1991) Consciousness Explained. Boston: Little Brown.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Dennett, D. (2017) From Bacteria to Bach and Back: The Evolution of Minds. New York, NY: Norton & Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Firestein, S. (2012) Ignorance. How It Drives Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Gallie, W.B. (1955) Essentially Contested Concepts, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society56, pp. 167-198.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gibbard, A. (1992) Wise Choices, Apt Feelings. A Theory of Normative Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Goldman, A. (2018) Expertise, Topoi37(1), pp. 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9410-3
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hacking, I. (1983) Representing and Intervening. Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hacking, I. (1996) The Looping Effects of Human Kinds, in: D.Sperber, D.Premack en A.J.James (eds.), Causal Cognition: A Multidisciplinary Debate. Oxford University Press, pp. 351-394.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hacking, I. (2002) Historical Ontology. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Harré, R. (1979) Social Being. A Theory for Social Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Harré, R en Moghaddam, F. (2012) Psychology for the Third Millennium. Integrating Cultural and Neuroscience Perspectives. London: Sage Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Hollis, M. (1977) Models of Man. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hollis, M. (1994) The Philosophy of Social Science: An Introduction. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Homan, T. (2013) Het et-ceteraprincipe. Een nieuw perspectief op organisatieontwikkeling. Amsterdam: Boom.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Ingold, T. (2001) From the Transmission of Representations to the Education of Attention, in: H.Whitehouse (ed.) The Debated Mind. Evolutionary Psychology versus Ethnography. London: Routledge, pp. 113-154.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Kant, I. (1784) Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung? [Vertaling: Wat is verlichting? En andere geschiedfilosofische geschriften. Amsterdam: Boom2021]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Kitcher, P. (2004) The Ends of the Sciences, in: B.Leiter (red.) The Future for Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 208-229.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Latour, B. (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Lorenz, C. (2012) If You’re So Smart, Why Are You under Surveillance? Universities, Neoliberalism, and New Public Management, Critical Inquiry38(3), pp. 467-678. https://doi.org/10.1086/664553
    [Google Scholar]
  34. McIntyre, L. en Rosenberg, A. (2016) The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Social Science. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Mead, G.H. (1934) Mind, Self, & Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Millgram, E. (2015) The Great Endarkenment. Philosophy for an Age of Hyperspecialization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Millidge, B., Seth, A. en Buckley, C.L. (2021) Predictive coding: A theoretical and experimental review, arXiv preprint, arXiv: 2107.12979.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Molenaar, P. en Campbell, C. (2009) The new person-specific paradigm in psychology, Current Directions in Psychological Science18(2), pp. 112-117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01619.x
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Parsons, K. (ed.) (2003) The Science Wars: Debating Scientific Knowledge and Technology. Amherst, MA: Prometheus Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Virno, P. (2015) When the Word Becomes Flesh: Language and Human Nature (G.Mecchia, vert.). South Pasadena, CA: Semiotext.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pettit, P. (1998) Defining and defending social holism, Philosophical Explorations1(3), pp. 169-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10001998098538698
    [Google Scholar]
  42. RicoeurP. (1981) Hermeneutics & the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Steege, M. van der en Zoon, M. (2016) Richtlijn Multiprobleemgezinnen. Utrecht: Nederlands Jeugdinstituut, Nederlandse Vereniging van Maatschappelijk Werkers, Nederlands Instituut van Psychologen, Nederlandse vereniging voor pedagogen en onderwijskundigen
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Tversky, A. en Kahneman, D. (1974) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty, Science185(4157), pp. 1124-1131.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Wheeler, M. (2007) Reconstructing the Cognitive World. The Next Step. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Zeijl, F. van (10februari2025) Doe-het-zelven als een Nigeriaan, Vrij Nederland.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/ANTW.2025.4.002.BRAN
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error